From what the dev who made it said, i find it sensible to call it a "Probability Map".
You want the "Gasoline Green" colour (mnemonic "GG"); not the light or dark blue, or in fact any variant of blue.
"Green is good".
DSS Overlay Map - Make it Better!
- Thread starter Greasetrap42
- Start date
"Green is good".
And that's because it depends on what factors the algorithm uses to determine whether a particular bio can grow there. I'm pretty sure it's a fact that altitude isn't a determining factor, but temperature is, hence an entire area can be blue, but those Recepta Umbrux are still in fact only found on mountains, so if the blue contains plains and mountains you are wasting your time looking around the plains. I can easily find Recepta Umbux because I in fact know to ignore the plain areas and only drop into the mountains, whereas you will spend hours or days flying around the plains area (because it's easier to search) then complain there are none!
I have acquired this knowledge through experience, and always, if I land in a blue area and fly around for 5 or 10 minutes and don't find what is supposed to be there, will fly up and look for different landscape types and check those, that way I get the experience necessary to find stuff.
You see the major mistake people still make with the blue location maps is they assume they show the location of bio, they don't, they have nothing to do with bio locations, they represent surface conditions. Take this for instance the conditions under which Aleoida Arcus are to be found;
The temperature and pressure conditions are among conditions which are used to determine the blue map, but quite often you will find some Aloida species will only appear in sandy areas and never rocky areas, these sub-conditions are conditions that need to be discovered by the CMDR, and if we all got together and listed out what we have experienced it would help a lot of players, indeed I try to help beginners when I can, however, we can't change the blue map, it's what FDEV have given us, and it's up to us CMDR's to determine what sub-factors some biology needs, they don't want to just hand us everything on a plate, which is probably why the old POI system went away.
I landed on a moon some months ago and a certain plant was only present on the two mountains there.
-they were ~5km high and so rugged you couldn't land on them, so it was quite a trek in the SRV.
That being said i did not check the temperature, so while i can't rule out that, i also can not rule out height being a factor.
In any case, biomes do factor in also; some plants only grow in areas on the "polar caps", shade, crevasses etc.
I've done enough bio-mapping that i feel i understand the system, however it might just be me.
Thank you for the added information in your post, always nice with more insight.
There are lots of worlds near(ish) the bubble where Fungoida Settisis seems only to be found in high precipitous locations that are almost inaccessible, however out towards the core and Colonia it can often be found on highish plateaus and broad ridges and not in its traditional inaccessible haunts.I landed on a moon some months ago and a certain plant was only present on the two mountains there.
-they were ~5km high and so rugged you couldn't land on them, so it was quite a trek in the SRV.
That being said i did not check the temperature, so while i can't rule out that, i also can not rule out height being a factor.
In any case, biomes do factor in also; some plants only grow in areas on the "polar caps", shade, crevasses etc.
I've done enough bio-mapping that i feel i understand the system, however it might just be me.
Thank you for the added information in your post, always nice with more insight.
So don’t be surprised when what you think you learned about a bio doesn’t seem to hold up everywhere.
I landed on a moon some months ago and a certain plant was only present on the two mountains there.
-they were ~5km high and so rugged you couldn't land on them, so it was quite a trek in the SRV.
That being said i did not check the temperature, so while i can't rule out that, i also can not rule out height being a factor.
In any case, biomes do factor in also; some plants only grow in areas on the "polar caps", shade, crevasses etc.
I've done enough bio-mapping that i feel i understand the system, however it might just be me.
Thank you for the added information in your post, always nice with more insight.
Sometimes the conditions are SO specific it's unbelievable. There was this frozen planet, covered in snow, except for small patches of bare ice, this bio would only grow on the ice, sometimes the patches were only a few meters across, on a perfectly flat plain. On the ice, the bio, surrounded by many kilometers of snowy ground, the same level, as far as I could tell the same temp, but the bio required ice and nothing else was different. Very hard to sample that one. As I recall it was one of the Electricae, so yes it can be as small a difference as that for determining the bio. Yes all the snow and ice was blue across half the planet, but it had to be bare ice patches and nothing else.
Sometimes I have had a few bodies where the patches of blue for a particular bio are so small you have trouble finding them, I think we've all had those. There was a planet where a single depression was the only habitat a bio appeared in, and yet that bio was often spread widely across other bodies I have been on. Was it the lower level, was it the air pressure, but it wasn't that deep a depression that should matter. Temperature, could have been warmer in there. Or maybe there's a layer of mineral under the ground that was only exposed in this depression. I mean do FDEV even generate the planet formation to that detail? It's possible, they've said in the past they do a lot of low level detail stuff on the planet that we might never notice except for the changes it creates with surface geology, a lot of bio is determined by mineral presence after all, and where these minerals are close to the surface may determine where the bio appears.
Unless FDEV actually release the algorithms responsible for bio location we may never know.
This site does have some info that supports the temperature idea, but when you have a non-tidally locked body with supposed Osseus spawns, yet they are very infrequently found on their spawn location(rocky, non-sandy terrain), it’s a bit of a headscratcher. Unless their spawns are taken up by hundreds of stratum or space aloe vera(aloeida).
ed-dsn.net
Exobiological Flora - Deep Space Network
This page references knowledge of biological species found on the surface of planets. Detailed species sheets by genus: Note: many of the images presented in this flora were provided by CMDRs who participated in the Artemis Biological Survey, an expedition organised by the DSN. Many thanks...
ed-dsn.net
Probably the same narrative as how Humans appeared on Sol 3 - along with a bunch of other flora and fauna - it all came from space, allegedly.
Yes, it has the finesse and attention to detail of the orrery map.
I don't know about game narrative but evolution is an acceptable narrative. If we found humans on other planets, we'd probably not believe they evolved in parallel with us. Now find them on 300 planets, maybe evolution is a one trick pony.
In many ways the orrery map is a classic example of be careful what you wish for.
The best thing about it is that it is done to scale.
The worst thing about it is that it is done to scale.
It isn’t something I use a lot but when I do it is to judge where I am relative to other stuff in a system, so I can decide if a trip is worth doing or if I should actually visit places in a different order. I see it as a tool and I like tools that don’t distract with unnecessary stuff.
I'm afraid I disagree with every one of your points: It's a classic example of be careful what you wish for "when you're asking people that drag their feet and don't want to give things they don't want to give". I mean the managers, not the devs. I can hardly picture a developer not wanting to excel at a given task. So, we've got another LVP component to the game.
So, done to scale is not the worst thing about it. Minimalism is, managers' attitude is. It's a token, a "here, take that, and stop begging for an orrery, it's done". It's like when they assign tasks they go like "create this, you've got 10 minutes. See what you come up with". Or, they could be offering them as a guide gift to visitor groups: "Who would like to design an orrery? Anyone? Ah, yes, the young man at the front..". And we have to live with that.
It's good that you persuaded yourself to see it as a tool, and that having it show planet info, rotations, and the other useful data of the system map would be unnecessary stuff, because otherwise you'd be sharing my point of view, and this game is too perfect to spoil the moment, right cmdr?
I disagree with all your points, especially the last one. Which is fine.
The game isn’t perfect but then I never expected it to be perfect.
Hence why i said i can't rule out either possibility.
-iirc the codex doesn't give those stats either.Without exact data from fdev it will only be "observational data" on our part anyways, although i must admit i have not correlated placement data.
No, the worst thing about it is
a) It defaults the view to the primary star, not your ship's position.
b) It doesn't remember what you were looking at. So every time you open the orrery view you must re-position the view in 3D space. If you are interested in the secondary star system... this just sucks.
If done properly the orrery view would definitely be my preferred system view. Instead it is frustrating and I never use it. Whoever gave the approval for this quite clearly does not play the game and just doesn't care about delivering useful game features. It is a shame because time and effort went into a feature that is almost good.
It doesn't have to be a heat map. It can instead be a combination map, showing where the distributions of the different organisms overlap. They can use a random colour set for that, even autogenerate a legend for it! Although that may be too useful and just end up shocking us.
SIf you think of pretty much everything in this game (except perhaps audio) as the 80/20 solution, then it makes sense: We only have rough sketches of functional features - no refining has happened before the team(s) moved on to the next fire.
S
I'd imagine that game doesn't spawn the individual bios until you are very close, so possibly hard to show exactly where they are from space. Thus the reason that it indicates where it might be found, not where it is to be found.
So, what colour am I supposed to be looking for? Despite looking around, all I can find are vague references to blue but to me, the whole screen looks blue. See below.
Yes, I am fairly colourblind and I have no idea what I am looking at. Cycling through the filters, I do not see anything change. I really would appreciate some help. Sorry if this is thread hijack. This is both sides of the same planet.
Yes, I am fairly colourblind and I have no idea what I am looking at. Cycling through the filters, I do not see anything change. I really would appreciate some help. Sorry if this is thread hijack. This is both sides of the same planet.
If the planet stays nearly completely blue when you change the bio filter, then it must mean that all 3 bios can be found all over the planet. Still general rules like bacteria growing on flat surfaces will hold true.